Thursday, April 17, 2008

I recently put up an album that I found in SoulSeek. I uploaded it here, because I liked it. I did not rip the mp3s myself. Is there something wrong with that? The person that ripped these files and put them in their SHARED folder, seemed to think so.

I'm very frustrated with this unwritten "rule book" for music blogging. I am doing this because I love music, playing music, music is MY LIFE. I'm not trying to step on anyone's toes. I'm not trying to say I'm better than anyone, and I'm not trying to get cool points. I'm not attempting to take credit (?) for uploading things first. I'm not even sure what "taking credit" for uploading music that isn't your own means anyway.

If anyone has anything to say about this... leave a comment. If not, that's fine too! I'm going to continue doing what I do.

31 comments:

Anonymous
said...

Oh my god, losers on Soulseek have been banning me for no apparent reason beyond maybe I'm not in their circle jerk. I offer a lot of songs in return but I still get banned. I've never asked one of these putzes about it because they're what I have to scrap off the bottom of my shoes after a day at the dog track. The best part is I know most if not all of them did nothing more than collect the songs in the way I was doing. For free!

I've noticed this on other blogs too, people griping and moaning about ownership of an album they ripped, put up, then the same rip is provided elsewhere. And these people get very narky about it too, which is just sad and absurd. They aren't in any position to declare ownership, I thought music blogging/slsk'ing was about sharing among the people? Not mean selfish petty mindedness. I think your blog is fantastic and has afforded me the chance to hear yet more music of this nature which is otherwise near impossible to find.

Fuck 'em. it should be a download free-for-all. Your blog, your passion, your favorites. My only complaint is when someone steals my words as if they are their own. I could give a shit if some one reposts everything I post... but write your own fuckin words. Even at that, I wouldn't loose sleep over it. I misspell half of what I write anyways and rarely make sense. Can I say FUCK one more time before I go...Cheers.

Music blogs, I believe were first created for a sole purpose. To share amongst the people who had a mutual love for what was being posted. There are so many whom have complained of the first posting,copywright, ownership, rip quality, and that the music sucks. Well, sound is free. No-one that I know of has been selling these albums, nor has anyhting other been said than " If you like it,buy it." Iam glad that everytime I use a sentence,word, or audible noise that someone else has, that I don't have to pay some royalty. I am sure the bible is copyrighted to someone.So, if verses were printed in full text somehwere and a reader became a christian from its message, does who owe the copy holder money because he heard the message? Is this analagy too far off? I think not. This has gotten rediculous and petty lately. Soulseek is a preview place. Anyone who would have actually bought an album anyways will get rid of the mp3s and buy the real album itself when, and if it is available. Anyone who wants to split straws that someone is hearing for free 5 songs off of something they are trying to sell can either be anal or take it in stride. Eitehr way. I think this is an excellent blog, and no ill ilk will change that. People are not just going to abandon all money transactions of music because of some post by the brave pioneers that are music bloggers.

If you know and like this kind of music is also thanks to persons that are sharing their own private collection, losing time to rip at least at a good quality and then upload/share it for the community.

Is a long and not so easy job, nobody is paying us to do it, just the passion for music and the love to share. Im into p2p programs since 97/98, when Napster was at the beta version, so i know what im talking about.

We are not in the position of course to decleare nothing, we r not the owners of these albums or nothing, but AT LEAST we buyed it and we shared for you all. If the work of rippers is not appreciated, i can even stop my blog... because everything i always ripped is coming from my collection.

For me - i repeat - is totally senseless to open a blog and re-share what is normally shared in every p2p program. So why not share the same albums that are uploaded in another blog? Pratically, is pretty much same, it changes nothing..but is very rare that it happens! So, the question is: WHY?

Ok I am a little less ' Fuzzy ' now, and I see what the context being discussed is better. Album ripps,post, and shared files are just that. Shared, or to be shared among the people. No-one should claim they were the first to rip it so they have dibs. I think it is better for it to be placed into multiple facets, so those whom have been exposed into one place, may find it in another. When you see an album's post it doesn't have the prefix of" Charlie's rip, or etc. " Anyone who would pitch a pity party over their shared material being further shared is ,in my opinion, unaware of the concept or definition of the word.

Just take into consideration the fact that Soulseek if full of files downloaded on the blogosphere, ripped by owners of blogs : do people sharing these files on Soulseek credit these blogs ? Never of course ! Blogs are just one of the many ways to share rarities and help them to circulate. Reclaiming rip copyright is just absurd !

Maybe i was not clear myself in the post before. I try to explain it better.

Probably you already know (or can imagine), that exists a parallel "movement" of mp3s,shared between a close circle of fans and no longer available in large compilation as New Wave Complex or Flexipop: what you find in the net is simply the iceberg of all this "movement".

One of the reason why it happened is almost clear. The ripping is increasing day by day the prices of records .. 5 / 6 years ago bands as the Factory or Schleimer K, just to do two examples, where not so "famous" as now, and it was possible to buy them for a normal price, in fact i did (ok i was lucky, i buyed Factory for 1€ eheh)

To do another exemple web-to-web: check out what happened with the Party Wall 12'': i buyed for few euro on discogs, then i ripped it and then some weeks ago I saw somebody buying it for 40 or 50 dollars on Ebay. Unfortunately, the facts are talking for me .. we are attending to a sort of backfire ..

Thanks to P2P programs i discovered a lot of bands and i think is normal and correct to rip and share what is not available still. I never said that the rippers got the copyrights on what they rip, cause is crazy even to think a topic like this. But the rippers are simply the motor, the engine of all this big mechanism, they spended or still spending a lot of money to buy records, cause Music, when is a passion, u can't control simply.

Also, one basic thing for me is to NOT RIP the things that r available to buy from the labels we all like (Annalogue Records, Minimal Wave, Viny On Demand, etc). They do great and difficoult job, with a small quantity of copies, they simply have to survive to print other things.

It's a long and very complicate topic, in fact im not satisfied at all for what i wrote..but at least i hope to give some ideas to think about.

What tristan.koreya also said about Blog->Slsk is true and is another good observation on this topic

though we have made great strides towards taking competition out of the internet paradigm

it will still exist because first the majority of people in the world that use the net are from western developed nations that no matter how socially liberal they may be still operate within a system of competition which is refelcted in everything- market, education, work, all the culture industries: music, film, literature, tv, advertising, fashion, etc.

and second the industry still controls the belief in competition in order for their bottom line proft to sustain and thus the majority of such industry is adapting to the internet and slowly buying up large infinite virtual tracks of cyberspace in an attempt to rectify corporate union

claiming ownership of ripped music is a way for the person caliming ownership to create social space between themselves and others which once at a distance the other has the potential to be perceived as less- which is reflective of the competitive nature of industry

yet the internet has the potential to enlighten us and part of that enlightment will come through sharing without claims or ownership

I agree with most of you and think the various egos that get involved where people claim some sort of ownership of something they do not own is pretty silly. I got called out for this some time ago when discussing the band the Desperate Bicycles, which I had ripped to share with friends, as it was out of print, then saw it for sale on eBay and eventually all just posted online. I was naive perhaps, but at the time, in pre-soulseek days, I thought there was some difference between making a mixtape of rare stuff for fellow fans and blatantly selling the thing online, or even sharing it for every and anybody.

I'm more resigned to expect that to happen.

However I see TP is, I think, referencing my complaint on the Ike Yard post when he talks about someone being anal when complaining about someone giving away 5 songs of something that is for sale. Let me make this clear. Music is not free. We're entering a weird stage where suddenly artists and labels are going to have to learn that they can expect to not make a single dime from actual sales. They can look to alternative sources of income, tour and play live...though that's tough on certain types of bedroom artists, or, god-forbid, reissue labels.

People can complain all they want and talk about how sound is free to share...but unfortunately there are copyright laws in existence and I guarantee if you were on the other side of fence you'd be greatful for that. It's not up to a blogger or a blog reader to decide which or how much copywritten music should or can be shared, and so long as we as a record label continue to invest time and money in remastering, packaging, liner notes etc and trying to hope that the artist gets their share of whatever meager profit there is, it's in our interest to have some say on how much of a particular release is or can be shared.

Now there are artists who share everything, they know they're not going to make any money, or they asssume people will buy the vinyl or CD eventually. To think that everybody who downloads music off a blog or Soulseek will try it out, and if they like, then purchase the music, is completely naive. If that is what you do, then more power to you. But for everybody who must own the CD or vinyl, there's a dozen people who primarily listen to music at their computer, on their iPod, not to mention iTV and Squeezebox type devices streaming the music to their stereo, and are more then happy to just download ripped copy of something for free.

i get music from soulseek, but i also love blogs like this and mutant sounds, systems of romance, etc... people need to lighten up and just be thankful we live in a tech age that ALLOWS us to discover forgotten bands and music that have been neglected for decades. the fact that smaller labels are realizing this and reissuing $$$ albums on cd for the first time is only icing on the cake.

I am not calling you anal Acute. I respect fully that you have released something so great as a collection of Ike Yard's work. I was a little out of it when I wrote the first spiel from last night. After re-reading it, I would restract alot. What my main point about the Ike Yard thing was that 'yes' the songs included in the post were part of a collection that was in print. But, the actual post was a self-contained ep that was out of print. So, I saw nothing wrong with it being posted. I am sorry for my rash words and meanderings that hadn't very little to do with what we were talking about. I fully respect the rights of the holders of music. I know that these artist and labels have to be supported in their efforts or they would cease to exist. Music is just such a great love of mine, but unfortunately with the cost of today's liveing, it becomes a luxury rather than a neccessity as it feels to be. I have become too acustomed to the free shareing of today's world. Be it right or wrong. I apologize to anyone I have wronged by my actions of not fully supporting the industry or have said harm against. I just love music, and usually can not afford to always purchase it properly. As far as the thing about someone makeing a mix of music, then getting mad about its' use elsewhere should do whatever anyone else does. Get a copyright. Then you will have something to bitch about. Other wise ..Wah,wah. Or like a friend of mine use to say" Two tears in a bucket...Fuck it." TymexPyres

why the fuck should we degrade art by commodifying it and attaching price?

it is time to move beyond that 20th century paradigm

attaching money to the whole thing corrupts the whole system

i would rather listen to my friends who make music for free give it to me for free and infuse it with some type of unique and independent essence that speaks more to OUR times and deals with contemporary issues as oppossed to buying remined music for a decent amount of money just becasue the music snobs have deemed it valuable when just 10 years ago this stuff was largely forgotten

blogs and bloggers are ensuring that it isn't forgotten

but attaching elitism, $$$$, etc. to it will turn it into just another coke product

instead of keeping the reverence which so rightly deserves to be attached to this wonderful music

Why does everything have to be for money? That's a good point. Why can't it be quid quo pro? This for that. I think the economy down to the price of a piece of bubblegum would be better of if everything was just exchanged for various trades. Someone needs something? Well, just trade it to them for so many of what you need. Things worked far better that way.I need good music, and artist need more exposure resurgence. Blogs do that.

Totally silly complaint. I used to post stuff that I found on Soulseek on my blog all the time. No one complained. They have nothing to complain about! It's not like they own the copyrights. Keep on sharing.

I have found hella' lot o' stuff on the seek, that I haven't in blogs.So, I don't know dude. It's a bitch when someone banns you for no good reason. Two soloutions to this are 1:Bann them too and ignore them,2: Start another account name and try again. THey won't know it's you;)

this is one of those arguments i can see both sides of, being both a blogger AND a musician myself. in the end, though i prefer if our record was purchased, i am all for the sharing of it so long as it is heard.

though the kind of music we're posting on our blogs is cherished and adored by some, it's also very underexposed and unheard. it's a shame really, and when i got into blogging, my sole intent was to share incredibly rare sounds and give information about each, a combination of soulseek and allmusic, if you will. even if i post something that's still somewhat available (infrastition, for example), i give several links so readers can pick these releases up. i do, often. if a band is newer, i simply post one or two tracks for a teaser and point them in the right direction. i've shifted away from newer sounds lately, but i may go back to it here and there...

as for rips, i have been fortunate enough to have friends digitize things for me. some of my posts feature my own rips and friend's, but some also are gathered from p2p networks. i try to be cautious about reposting an exact record that another blog hit on, but that's been increasingly hard to keep track of (as i note in my last entry). however, in the end, so long as no one is stealing my words without linking back to me, i don't mind if someone reuploads and shares it somewhere else.

it will be nice when we no longer even care about claiming ownership to our own words or msic but everything is just for anyone to use however they want everything becomes recyclable without any claims of property [which is reflective of turning abstraction into logical commodity] or any contractual terms.

I believe in day jobs...to not produce or share music because you can't profit from it is ludicrous, selfish, and honestly completely fucking evil. You can't set a price on art...you just can't. The world has changed (for the better I think) and the artists need to get a grip that they may need to do "unpleasant" things like (gasp) W-O-R-K like the rest of us "proles" to keep their dreams alive.

No "us and them", EVER!!! --SP.S.: Yes, upping brand new releases is in bad tase (I just love how the cocksucking buzzkill RIAA-calling nerds seem to ASSUME you're a TOTAL pirate for being pro-download).

I may as well throw in my two cent in to the debate. I don't believe in puttin a password on to any RAR files i put up, unlike alot of blogs but I was pretty pissed off when I came across a blog that just copied and pasted the majority of my posts up onto his blog, with no reference to where he got them in the first place. I wont have minded if he had referenced were he came across them. It's all about common courtesies, which seems to has gone out the window.

You can say whatever about the world that we should live in but the reality is this: if you didn't create something, then you have nothing invested in it and you shouldn't care either way. If you did create something then you should be able to do whatever you want with it, including sell it, eat it, throw it in the garbage or give it away. As far as rights are concerned laws concerning copyrights are here to stay so just get used to it. They've been put in place to protect the artists rights so you have to deal with the flip side which is, not everything is free. Don't get me wrong, I download the hell out of whatever I want and wherever I can find it but if someone who owns the rights to it asked me to stop I would comply without resistance because the reality is that people own things and it's not just Western civilization. Musicians have made a living playing music since the beginning of civilization. Unfortunately we can't take certain luxuries form civilization and dump the legal aspects because they are annoying. The bigger picture is that property laws are in place because without them all you're shit would get stolen. Music recordings are included in intellectual property although mp3 sharing inevitably has created some massive grey areas that may never be black and white which is fine to me because I really do think everyone benefits from sharing. However I do disagree with the notion that you can somehow keep sitting at home playing music while our economy gets converted to wilderness and nobody gets paid for anything. You know whoever says that artists shouldn't get paid should be the unassuming poster child for the right wings. Our governments already removed just about every bit of funding for the arts in general so don't encourage them to starve us even more. We SHOULD be getting paid to provide good music to our community to ensure that it doesn't whither and die.